"Clear and Present Danger" movie - F18 LGB attack scene

It's always nice to watch old movies that you've seen as a kid and retrospectively check their integrity :)

For "Clear and present danger" - it's seem they've done a good job filming at the correct cockpit... but when it's clear the plane is still on the ground with it's engines OFF. Still interesting so see the differences between the in-movie cockpit and DCS cockpit. Is that a F/A-18A? or C with old lot?

Here's a pic from the Weapon Officer office that have similar characteristics.

https://nara.getarchive.net/media/the-cockpit-of-an-fa-18-hornet-aircraft-showing-the-display-and-control-console-14aa05

It's always nice to watch old movies that you've seen as a kid and retrospectively check their integrity :)

Haha, true. :thumbup:

It's even more troublesome as I used to admire Tom Clancy for the insane amount of technical and technological knowledge he used to put into his books. I'd never read anything remotely as technical, and at the same time as suspenseful, as The Hunt for Red October and Clear and Present Danger, and some of the other Jack Ryan novels.

And then Hollywood hires top tier actors, pays millions of dollars, and fails with the technical details. It's as if they were recording the orchestra in a parking lot at rush hour - hey, the audience doesn't consist of professional musicians, we don't care about the few people who will complain... :music_whistling:

Hardly really 'fail'.

I mean, when they made it in the early 90s they - evidenced by the 'computer scenes' in the very same movie - were rather unlikely to expect that years later somebody would look at the sequence in still frames piece by piece and compare it to pictures of the real thing like that.

Nowadays you got to expect that sort of thing, but back then...

P.S.: in related news, there is the story of Stanley Kubrick and his set designers getting into trouble over the 'Dr. Strangelove' and the FBI not being very happy about parts of it looking realistic. They pretty much built it on basis of a few photographs that had been in magazines and a bit of guesswork.

The HUD is off, too, but all that's nothing compared to the left DDI and all its cautions telling you it's obviously a Hornet on the ground before startup (with the canopy open). At least the weapons page is set to AUTO mode and QTY 1, which does fit what happened in the movie. Still, for such a brief couple seconds of footage, I imagine there wasn't budget for it.

(with the canopy open)

What? you don't fly with the ladder out and the canopy open?

Still, for such a brief couple seconds of footage, I imagine there wasn't budget for it.

This. And really aside from navy pilots and some of the folks on this site who is going to notice?

Just be happy it appears to be an actual F18 cockpit and not a Top Gun style Mig 28 scenario.

The amount of advisory messages is killing me :lol:

I would be really concerned if this bird was airborne :D

For a brief couple of seconds we get actual hornet cockpit with the pilot interacting with

Pretty realistic for a Hollywood movie. Personally not worth nitpickery given it's not a a film centered around aviation. Pretty impressive they used a actual hornet cockpitUnlike some dedicated aircraft films that had innacurate mockups vs actual pits for thier respective aircraft( cough iron eagle), or fake software displayed behind real life mods.

Hell even top gun had pretty little camera footage of the pilot or Rio interacting with thier avionics

The bomb run scene in "The Rock" showed a pretty accurate (considering Hollywood) HUD just before James Caviezel drops his bombs on Alcatraz.

v6,

boNes

And what about the final scene of "Tears of the Sun" ?

"But Director, that's the Spin Recovery switch! The Master Arm is on the OTHER SIDE of the cockpit!"

"I don't care, it's got a cool safety cover, caution stripes, and a pretty red light. Just like, paint Missile Arm on it or something"

"But Director, that's the Spin Recovery switch! The Master Arm is on the OTHER SIDE of the cockpit!"

"I don't care, it's got a cool safety cover, caution stripes, and a pretty red light. Just like, paint Missile Arm on it or something"

10/10

I would also argue a rocket attack in the 2000 like it's Vietnam all over again.

At 3:17 the plane has no weapons :megalol:

You know the Special Effects Coordinator was saying "Just two more weeks!"

And what about the final scene of "Tears of the Sun" ?

 

lol the moview here AGm88 Harms were some sort of massively highly explosive rockets

@Wags: is this planned for DCS?! I really really would like to have this super massive bambam fire rockets :D:D

Clearly ED got it wrong. This should be corrected immediately. "spin recovery switch" I always thought that sounded phony.

"But Director, that's the Spin Recovery switch! The Master Arm is on the OTHER SIDE of the cockpit!"

"I don't care, it's got a cool safety cover, caution stripes, and a pretty red light. Just like, paint Missile Arm on it or something"

@Wags: is this planned for DCS?! I really really would like to have this super massive bambam fire rockets :D:D

Mk-77 is planned, not a rocket but same effect.

How can "Tears of the Sun" be such a bullshit on every part. They should watch movies before trying to make some.

To be honest I'm looking forward to releasing that napalm more than just about any other weapon for the Hornet.

To be honest I'm looking forward to releasing that napalm more than just about any other weapon for the Hornet.

Well given that we are not getting the B61.... I mean come on why should the red team get all the low yield tactical nuke fun! (Or a B83 if you just want to wipe out a chunk of the map!)

How can "Tears of the Sun" be such a bullshit on every part. They should watch movies before trying to make some.

Funny thing is that movie is particulary well made in any other part excluding THAT scene.

From the Seals gear to some shots on the carrier but THAT missile arm switch ....:doh:

Funny thing is that movie is particulary well made in any other part excluding THAT scene.

From the Seals gear to some shots on the carrier but THAT missile arm switch ....:doh:

Actually, the scenes on the carrier always cracked me up. From the captain strolling around the flight deck on the phone to my personal favourite of taking the ambassador's helmet off him as soon as he's on the deck.

Hardly really 'fail'.

 

I mean, when they made it in the early 90s they - evidenced by the 'computer scenes' in the very same movie - were rather unlikely to expect that years later somebody would look at the sequence in still frames piece by piece and compare it to pictures of the real thing like that.

 

Nowadays you got to expect that sort of thing, but back then...

 

P.S.: in related news, there is the story of Stanley Kubrick and his set designers getting into trouble over the 'Dr. Strangelove' and the FBI not being very happy about parts of it looking realistic. They pretty much built it on basis of a few photographs that had been in magazines and a bit of guesswork.

Yep, well said.

I didn't know that about Stanley Kubrick. Ha!

Funny thing is that movie is particulary well made in any other part excluding THAT scene.

From the Seals gear to some shots on the carrier but THAT missile arm switch ....:doh:

Except for the part where Bruce's Aimpoint is mounted backwards, lol.

At 3:17 the plane has no weapons :megalol:

They were stealth weapons that are invisible to mortals.:joystick:

And what about the final scene of "Tears of the Sun" ?

 

A disgraceful representation!